architect
Regular Member
imported post
xdm guy wrote:
xdm guy wrote:
Yeah, me too. Maybe an ACORN guy who suddenly has a lot of free time on his hands.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
What would you do
- Thread starter tcmech
- Start date
imported post
Pssst - hey buddy got a gun I kin buy. Just put it in this brake pad box and I'll give you a "refund." NOT !
This type of thing has never struck me as funny or innocent. :X
I think that if ever somebody were to ask me that question, I'll ask them immediately for ID.
Yata hey
Pssst - hey buddy got a gun I kin buy. Just put it in this brake pad box and I'll give you a "refund." NOT !
This type of thing has never struck me as funny or innocent. :X
I think that if ever somebody were to ask me that question, I'll ask them immediately for ID.
Yata hey
Repeater
Regular Member
imported post
wrightme wrote:
Forget amnesty, look where Democrats now stoop for votes!
Proposed law would grant Obama's party deluge of new supporters
Democrats in Congress are pushing for a new law that would allow nearly 4 million people currently banned from voting to cast their ballot, and most of those millions, studies show, will vote Democrat.
And where will these new voters come from?
From the ranks of convicted felons.
Last week, a House subcommittee heard testimony on H.R. 3335, the "Democracy Restoration Act." The bill seeks to override state laws, which vary in how they restrict when convicted felons released from prison can vote.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., and sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., states, "The right of an individual who is a citizen of the United States to vote in any election for federal office shall not be denied or abridged because that individual has been convicted of a criminal offense unless such individual is serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election."
Advocates of the bill trumpet it as a civil rights issue and a matter of freedom, while pointing out that a disproportionate number of black and Hispanic Americans have been disenfranchised by laws restricting felons from voting.
And if that happens, a new study co-authored by criminologist Christopher Uggen of the University of Minnesota indicates, the felon vote could give many close elections to the Democrats.
wrightme wrote:
Maybe John Conyers can help:
Forget amnesty, look where Democrats now stoop for votes!
Proposed law would grant Obama's party deluge of new supporters
Democrats in Congress are pushing for a new law that would allow nearly 4 million people currently banned from voting to cast their ballot, and most of those millions, studies show, will vote Democrat.
And where will these new voters come from?
From the ranks of convicted felons.
Last week, a House subcommittee heard testimony on H.R. 3335, the "Democracy Restoration Act." The bill seeks to override state laws, which vary in how they restrict when convicted felons released from prison can vote.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., and sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., states, "The right of an individual who is a citizen of the United States to vote in any election for federal office shall not be denied or abridged because that individual has been convicted of a criminal offense unless such individual is serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election."
Advocates of the bill trumpet it as a civil rights issue and a matter of freedom, while pointing out that a disproportionate number of black and Hispanic Americans have been disenfranchised by laws restricting felons from voting.
And if that happens, a new study co-authored by criminologist Christopher Uggen of the University of Minnesota indicates, the felon vote could give many close elections to the Democrats.
pourshot
Campaign Veteran
imported post
tcmech wrote:
tcmech wrote:
Get your rights restored and then come see me....
CommonwealthKid
New member
imported post
Agreed. He needs to find a good attorney who can make a plea before a judge to have his record expunged.
Agreed. He needs to find a good attorney who can make a plea before a judge to have his record expunged.
Hef
Regular Member
imported post
If he is a convicted felon and you know it or even suspect it, you would be committing a crime in selling him a gun. If you don't believe he's a convicted felon, then ask him and he replies in the negative, and then sell him a gun, you have committed no crime, but if he lied he's committed a crime in buying it.
If he's really a convicted felon and can't legally buy a gun, he can petition the court to have his rights restored. Since it's a DV, the Lautenberg Act may keep him from legally buying a gun ever again.
He needs to talk to a lawyer.
If he is a convicted felon and you know it or even suspect it, you would be committing a crime in selling him a gun. If you don't believe he's a convicted felon, then ask him and he replies in the negative, and then sell him a gun, you have committed no crime, but if he lied he's committed a crime in buying it.
If he's really a convicted felon and can't legally buy a gun, he can petition the court to have his rights restored. Since it's a DV, the Lautenberg Act may keep him from legally buying a gun ever again.
He needs to talk to a lawyer.
imported post
pourshot wrote:
unless he knows a Federal Judge then he cant get his rights restored. Unless he gets the Gov to issue a pardon for that specific crime with the intentions to restore his gun rights listed.
This is based on domestic violence not felony.
pourshot wrote:
unless he knows a Federal Judge then he cant get his rights restored. Unless he gets the Gov to issue a pardon for that specific crime with the intentions to restore his gun rights listed.
This is based on domestic violence not felony.
kenny
Regular Member
imported post
CommonwealthKid wrote:
CommonwealthKid wrote:
One can not expunge a record in Virginia. You have it for life. The process is known as Restoration of Rights, then on to Circuit Court for the Judge to grant you the privilege of possessing and owning a firearm.
CommonwealthKid
New member
imported post
Thanks for the clarification. What if the DV was from another state?
Thanks for the clarification. What if the DV was from another state?
kenny
Regular Member
imported post
peter nap wrote:
peter nap wrote:
Correct, but we were not talking about an arrest only. The post clearly indicated a conviction. Sorry but I do not read between someone else lines, only my own.
kenny
Regular Member
imported post
CommonwealthKid wrote:
Each state has there own wording and laws related to the matter. An example, you get your rights restored in Virginia is does not automatically transfer to any state. In Nevada for example their law say you must have received a pardon from the governor. Get a pardon in Virginia does not automatically restore ones voting rights or the privilege to own or possess firearms. However some state do recognize it.
So you get your rights restored in VA and the court order and say you travel to Nevada and for whatever reason you make contact with leo. Because you are not complying with Nevada law leo can arrest you, most likely he will only take your weapon. They are several documented cases just like this one. The good news is leo will ship your firearm to FFL of your choice for transfer back to you in Virginia. Of course if you have a CHP and it is recognized by the state you are in you should be o.k. but not in Nevada. nevada will not recognize VA until VA has a mandatory fingerprint requirement. We know that will never happen.
Morale of the story, Stay out of trouble in the first place.
CommonwealthKid wrote:
Each state has there own wording and laws related to the matter. An example, you get your rights restored in Virginia is does not automatically transfer to any state. In Nevada for example their law say you must have received a pardon from the governor. Get a pardon in Virginia does not automatically restore ones voting rights or the privilege to own or possess firearms. However some state do recognize it.
So you get your rights restored in VA and the court order and say you travel to Nevada and for whatever reason you make contact with leo. Because you are not complying with Nevada law leo can arrest you, most likely he will only take your weapon. They are several documented cases just like this one. The good news is leo will ship your firearm to FFL of your choice for transfer back to you in Virginia. Of course if you have a CHP and it is recognized by the state you are in you should be o.k. but not in Nevada. nevada will not recognize VA until VA has a mandatory fingerprint requirement. We know that will never happen.
Morale of the story, Stay out of trouble in the first place.
imported post
kenny wrote:
kenny wrote:
a circuit ct can not restore your right to possess firearms for a domestic violence conviction. Since its a fed charge it must be done by their standards which in Va there is only one way outside of Federal judge, or Presidential Pardon and thats Gov pardon with proof that the pardon restores firearms rights.
Wooley
Regular Member
imported post
OP, if you had no doubt you wouldn't have asked. If it felt sketchy to you, go with that gut feeling and walk.
OP, if you had no doubt you wouldn't have asked. If it felt sketchy to you, go with that gut feeling and walk.
kenny
Regular Member
imported post
tkd2006 wrote:
tkd2006 wrote:
Can I assume you mean it is a federal law or regulation? Domestic violence charges are heard each and every dayin Virginia's General District and Circuit Court's on state charges. I can't imagine that the feds would prosecute a spouse or partner beater. I've never researched the issue before, to be truthful I don't hang with that type of crowd.
imported post
kenny wrote:
kenny wrote:
The domestic violence conviction can happen in any court but the federal prohibitor can not be removed by a circuit ct. Va doesnt have a domestic violence law restricting purchasing, or possessing a firearm but the feds do and thats how people get denied a purchase.
imported post
peter nap wrote:
This would seem to not be so much a Tea Party rig as one designed by and for Vanerboegh supporters.
(sarcastic pun intended)
Yata hey
peter nap wrote:
It takes two of those rigs to get the camel to drink. :shock:
This would seem to not be so much a Tea Party rig as one designed by and for Vanerboegh supporters.
(sarcastic pun intended)
Yata hey
GWRedDragon
Regular Member
imported post
tkd2006 wrote:
See, that's what I was thinking. Doesn't that just apply to purchase from an FFL, and not a private sale?
tkd2006 wrote:
See, that's what I was thinking. Doesn't that just apply to purchase from an FFL, and not a private sale?